Sitting in our service yesterday, my minister related the story of Hosea Ballou's ordination. At the convention held at Oxford, Massachusetts in 1794, Ballou was in the pulpit with Elhanan Winchester and Joab Young. At the conclusion of his sermon, without warning, Winchester held the Bible against Ballou's chest, crying out, "Brother Ballou, I press to your heart the written Jehovah!" Winchester then ordered Young to charge him. My minister quipped that he imagined that I wished it would happen that quickly.
Frankly, yes I do wish it would happen that quickly. Well, at least I wish that it could happen that spontaneously. I do fantasize that I will give a sermon so moving, that the congregation would immediately demand that I be ordained on the spot. Because I am, at heart, a preacher and I believe in the power of the sermon to move people and to change lives.
One conundrum that has perplexed me throughout my long journey toward ministry involves my Uncle Bob, who died about 10 years ago. You had to meet Uncle Bob to really appreciate him. He lived in Memphis and had that mild, slow Southern drawl that just lulled you to sleep. He loved telling whoppers. I mean, he never told little lies...he told massive lies. Uncle Bob's lies were never malicious. In ancient times, he would have been an historian -- never letting the truth get in the way of a good story. And, he did it so convincingly, so gently and sincerely, that you gladly swallowed everything he fed you.
The man also loved to horse-trade. He would be driving down the street and see a car he liked in a showroom window. Into the dealership he would drive and trade in his car. I don't think the man ever owned any car for more than a year.
Oh yes, and he was a Baptist minister. Now, my Uncle Bob never went to seminary or had any formal training. He didn't take college courses on the Bible, do a module of clinical pastoral education, serve an internship, or earn a degree. But, his small congregation loved him dearly all the same. He worked a full-time job selling linens during the week, but the man was a minister.
Do I wish a path like his was open to me? I don't know. I understand the purpose of all the rigorous training and assessment. But, sometimes, I wonder whether all of this structure around the preparation of ministers somehow shapes us a little too much into standard molds. Sometimes, I wonder if all this "discernment" is really more about conforming and less about finding a true self-identity. Sometimes, I wonder if we wouldn't be a little better off having a few Uncle Bob's in our ministry.
S0, that is my challenge. I will jump through all of the hoops and complete every requirement necessary to become a Unitarian Universalist minister. But, there will always be a little Uncle Bob inside, yearning to tell the occasional whopper and able to adapt and change at a moment's notice if the spirit calls or the situation demands.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Friday, February 8, 2008
Cloverfield
As a seminarian, I of course have no life. Between classes, student ministry that feeds my spirit, my job that feeds my body, and various interviews and requirements, I don't get out to the movies often. But, since I am a huge Lost fan, and a lifelong addict of horror/monster movies, I had to go see J.J. Abrams new movie, Cloverfield. If you have not read any reviews yet, DON'T. Just go see the movie without any knowledge of what it is supposed to be about. If you have already read reviews, then try forget what everyone has said (I know that's like telling you to ignore the elephant in the middle of the room) and go see it.
Cloverfield is not a great movie. But, I think it is an interesting movie with real potential for teaching moments and coffee shop discussion. And, I believe that the film has Unitarian Universalist implications worthy of consideration.
First, let me respond to some of the criticisms being leveled at the film. (spoiler alert! From here on, I will assume that you have seen the movie and will discuss relevant details.)
The characters are two-dimensional/stereotyped -- At the beginning, the 20-somethings are presented as urban yuppies in standard stereotypes. But, after everything explodes, much happens against type. The "ice-queen" sacrifices herself to save someone whose advances she has been rejecting. The "dork" sacrifices himself to film for posterity the extraordinary events. The main character's epiphany, while seemingly sudden, is very real. Nothing really matters in life except true love.
The jarring film quality is annoying and unrealistic -- On the contrary, I thought the film looked exactly like a film would look shot under those conditions, taping over a previously taped set of events. If you have ever used a hand-held video camera, you will recognize its reality.
The story is nonexistent -- But, that is the point. There is not supposed to be a "story." This film is one tiny snippet of chaos in a world gone mad. There are no scientists or generals coming to save the day here. Will Smith or Bruce Willis does not dramatically defy the odds. Like most of our lives, when stuff happens, we don't really understand why. These are real people in an incredible situation. They have no super powers or specific expertise to help them.
The movie is insanely short -- You got me there. At barely 70 minutes without the credits, this hardly qualifies as a television episode. Still, it will have zero impact on the small screen.
So why did I like the film? I liked Cloverfield because it provides us some useful opportunities for discussion. For instance:
Part of the problem, I believe, is that we tend to over-analyze movies. Analysis is not a bad thing, but can limit us if we start from a set of assumptions which do not fit the particular film. For instance, many people hated the 28 Days films because everyone knows that zombies can't run - George Romero taught us that. Who says? Why does a filmmaker have to explain anything to me? Why can't people act irrationally (they certainly do in real life!)
So, I say, give Cloverfield a chance. And, especially, try to avoid the standard "Oscar" questions and get to the more visceral meanings of the film.
Cloverfield is not a great movie. But, I think it is an interesting movie with real potential for teaching moments and coffee shop discussion. And, I believe that the film has Unitarian Universalist implications worthy of consideration.
First, let me respond to some of the criticisms being leveled at the film. (spoiler alert! From here on, I will assume that you have seen the movie and will discuss relevant details.)
The characters are two-dimensional/stereotyped -- At the beginning, the 20-somethings are presented as urban yuppies in standard stereotypes. But, after everything explodes, much happens against type. The "ice-queen" sacrifices herself to save someone whose advances she has been rejecting. The "dork" sacrifices himself to film for posterity the extraordinary events. The main character's epiphany, while seemingly sudden, is very real. Nothing really matters in life except true love.
The jarring film quality is annoying and unrealistic -- On the contrary, I thought the film looked exactly like a film would look shot under those conditions, taping over a previously taped set of events. If you have ever used a hand-held video camera, you will recognize its reality.
The story is nonexistent -- But, that is the point. There is not supposed to be a "story." This film is one tiny snippet of chaos in a world gone mad. There are no scientists or generals coming to save the day here. Will Smith or Bruce Willis does not dramatically defy the odds. Like most of our lives, when stuff happens, we don't really understand why. These are real people in an incredible situation. They have no super powers or specific expertise to help them.
The movie is insanely short -- You got me there. At barely 70 minutes without the credits, this hardly qualifies as a television episode. Still, it will have zero impact on the small screen.
So why did I like the film? I liked Cloverfield because it provides us some useful opportunities for discussion. For instance:
- If you thought you only had hours to live, what would you try to do at all costs?
- For what cause or action would you be willing to risk your safety, even your life?
- How do you define yourself? Is it job or possessions, or is it the quality of your relationships and who you are as a person?
- In a crisis, are you a leader or a follower? What drives you toward either?
- As Unitarian Universalists, how would you assess the actions of the characters? Can you imagine any of them being UU?
Part of the problem, I believe, is that we tend to over-analyze movies. Analysis is not a bad thing, but can limit us if we start from a set of assumptions which do not fit the particular film. For instance, many people hated the 28 Days films because everyone knows that zombies can't run - George Romero taught us that. Who says? Why does a filmmaker have to explain anything to me? Why can't people act irrationally (they certainly do in real life!)
So, I say, give Cloverfield a chance. And, especially, try to avoid the standard "Oscar" questions and get to the more visceral meanings of the film.
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Illusions in America Today #6
In the past day, I read two articles that characterize the state of health in our country today. One was an opinion letter from a doctor decrying schemes of socialized medicine that guarantee health care only by destroying the rights of physicians, hospitals and insurance companies. Another was a blog posting from discontinuous permafrost about toxic chemicals in common plastic bottles. If you are like me, you are so thoroughly sick of hearing about how everything in our lives causes some debilitating disease, that you do not even pay attention anymore. Unfortunately, that is exactly the reaction people who crave wealth at your expense hope for.
In America today, there are dedicated people who genuinely care about making your world healthier and safer for you and future generations. But, for every one of them, there is someone else who could not care less about your well being and whose number one priority is reporting the maximum possible quarterly profits for his or her corporation. And, for every one of them, there are hundreds of investors (including you and me if we have money in stock-based retirement plans) who want to get the biggest bang from their hard-earned investment dollar. Who wins? I think it is easy to see that the driving force of the American economy will win out over inconvenience, environmental degradation, and potential health risks most of the time.
You may be thinking, but what can I do? I am one person, and I do not have the time or energy to keep up with this mountain of threats. I am one person, so my little boycott or letter to a company cannot possibly make a difference. I am one person, so what can my $100 donation to the Sierra Club accomplish up against billion dollar corporations. And, you would be right. By yourself, there is little you can do. American citizens, lacking a comprehensive and purpose-driven structure, can do little but ride the waves of special interests who wield the power in this country.
But, as intentional communities, there is much that people can do. If we organize ourselves into neighborhoods that share the burden and act collectively, we could make a difference. At first, we would merely set an example for others to emulate. But, in time, hundreds of such communities, working together to make ethical choices, investing only in products that meet stringent codes of health and safety, and ensuring that everyone has fair access to health care, could make a difference.
Perhaps I am innocent...even naive about the way the world works. But, it seems to me that if even one child dies today because health care was not available to help them, then as a society we have failed. If one person develops cancer because of a toxin in plastic bottles who only purpose was to shave 1/10 of a cent off the cost of production, then as a society we have failed. The rights of doctors and the rights of patients are not mutually exclusive. The earning of fair profits and maintaining the health of our citizens are not mutually exclusive goals. But, it will take a new American Revolution if we the people are to reclaim this nation from those who do not share our goals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
In America today, there are dedicated people who genuinely care about making your world healthier and safer for you and future generations. But, for every one of them, there is someone else who could not care less about your well being and whose number one priority is reporting the maximum possible quarterly profits for his or her corporation. And, for every one of them, there are hundreds of investors (including you and me if we have money in stock-based retirement plans) who want to get the biggest bang from their hard-earned investment dollar. Who wins? I think it is easy to see that the driving force of the American economy will win out over inconvenience, environmental degradation, and potential health risks most of the time.
You may be thinking, but what can I do? I am one person, and I do not have the time or energy to keep up with this mountain of threats. I am one person, so my little boycott or letter to a company cannot possibly make a difference. I am one person, so what can my $100 donation to the Sierra Club accomplish up against billion dollar corporations. And, you would be right. By yourself, there is little you can do. American citizens, lacking a comprehensive and purpose-driven structure, can do little but ride the waves of special interests who wield the power in this country.
But, as intentional communities, there is much that people can do. If we organize ourselves into neighborhoods that share the burden and act collectively, we could make a difference. At first, we would merely set an example for others to emulate. But, in time, hundreds of such communities, working together to make ethical choices, investing only in products that meet stringent codes of health and safety, and ensuring that everyone has fair access to health care, could make a difference.
Perhaps I am innocent...even naive about the way the world works. But, it seems to me that if even one child dies today because health care was not available to help them, then as a society we have failed. If one person develops cancer because of a toxin in plastic bottles who only purpose was to shave 1/10 of a cent off the cost of production, then as a society we have failed. The rights of doctors and the rights of patients are not mutually exclusive. The earning of fair profits and maintaining the health of our citizens are not mutually exclusive goals. But, it will take a new American Revolution if we the people are to reclaim this nation from those who do not share our goals of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Illusions in America Today #5
Our schools abound with amazing people and success stories. But, the general decline of education in America continues in spite of the dedicated efforts of talented people. Thousands of research projects in recent decades have produced no universal answers to the problem, and massive bureaucracy limits the scope of our interventions to mere incrementalism.
Before identifying the causes of the problem and possible solutions, we must recongize that schools as we know them today are a very new invention of human society. And yet, there are those who want you to believe that the institution is sacrosanct; that the current structure exists for good reasons. The fact is that the American educational system remains the biggest social experiment in human history, but that this juggernaut has no captain or navigator.
I believe that the problems of the American educational system are many, but are mostly rooted in these issues:
Before identifying the causes of the problem and possible solutions, we must recongize that schools as we know them today are a very new invention of human society. And yet, there are those who want you to believe that the institution is sacrosanct; that the current structure exists for good reasons. The fact is that the American educational system remains the biggest social experiment in human history, but that this juggernaut has no captain or navigator.
I believe that the problems of the American educational system are many, but are mostly rooted in these issues:
- Lack of equitable funding -- How can we ever hope to overcome classism, racism, poverty, and other societal ills when some schools get $20,000/year to spend per student and others get $2,000/year per student?
- A time structure that is out of sync with society -- At a time when most couples must both work to survive financially, it is madness to send children to empty homes in mid-afternoon and for one-quarter of the year.
- Lack of student focus -- Our curriculum is far too rigid to allow teachers the freedom to facilitate student-centered learning and the encouragement of unique talents.
- Isolation -- Our schools have become the easy repository of too many community problems without the benefit of community support and interaction.
- a daily school schedule with hours of time for recreation, socialization, and open exploration;
- a curriculum based not on grade levels and standardized test scores, but on each student's individual capabilities and talents;
- full integration with family and community life so that school is more about learning and less about indoctrination and discipline; and
- a goal of producing independent thinkers, free spirits, happy and creative young adults, who leave school knowing what they want to do with their lives.
Thursday, January 31, 2008
The Test Pattern of Our Identity
Sitting here trying to work, and all I can think about is Lost returning to TV tonight (woo , hoo!) Now, I watch my share of television programming, but have found myself uninterested in the recent hit shows. Reality television bores me and I can't bear to watch these cruel competition series. And frankly, after 50 years, there just are not too many new ideas out there.
But, looking back over my life, there have always been one of two shows that I never missed. I don't mean shows like Law and Order, which I have eventually caught in re-runs, but shows for which everything else in life stopped. In a world of TIVO and On-Demand viewing, I think people are missing out on the expectation and planning involved.
So, here is my life defined by shows I never missed (at least until they ran their creative course - I can't watch the death throes of past favorites).
Of course, I'm sure others might look at my list and think, "no wonder he is so strange - look at what he watched growing up!" It is bizarre that Unitarian Rod Serling had such an impact on me as a child, since I did not discover Unitarian Universalism until long after his death. And, Gene Roddenberry had far more to do with my theological formation than any minister.
So, what does the list of your life look like?
But, looking back over my life, there have always been one of two shows that I never missed. I don't mean shows like Law and Order, which I have eventually caught in re-runs, but shows for which everything else in life stopped. In a world of TIVO and On-Demand viewing, I think people are missing out on the expectation and planning involved.
So, here is my life defined by shows I never missed (at least until they ran their creative course - I can't watch the death throes of past favorites).
- Lost
- West Wing
- ER
- N.Y.P.D. Blue
- Beauty and the Beast
- L.A. Law
- Hill Street Blues
- Dallas
- M*A*S*H
- Hawaii Five-O
- All in the Family
- Rowan and Martin's Laugh In
- Star Trek
- The Addams Family
- Outer Limits
- Twilight Zone
Of course, I'm sure others might look at my list and think, "no wonder he is so strange - look at what he watched growing up!" It is bizarre that Unitarian Rod Serling had such an impact on me as a child, since I did not discover Unitarian Universalism until long after his death. And, Gene Roddenberry had far more to do with my theological formation than any minister.
So, what does the list of your life look like?
Monday, January 28, 2008
"To snore, perchance to dream..."
On a (much) less serious note, let me add my (considerable) weight in support of the growing use in common parlance of the word 'snarky.' In the months-old tradition of the pizzatorium, snarky combines the tantalizing flavors of British and American slang, with a solid saucy foundation of meaning and auditory pleasure.
A "snarky" comment is critical in a sarcastic and cynical sort of way. Apparently, the adjective dates back to early 20th century British slang. According to one online dictionary, snarky comes from snark, meaning to nag, snore, or snort from the Dutch and Low German word snorken. To be honest, I don't care about the origin - I just like the word. Snarky is one of those words that one does not really need to know in order to surmise its meaning from context. When someone says, "That was a really snarky thing to say," you really get the picture without Webster's help.
Some definitions I found included a tint of snottiness or arrogance to the meaning of snarky. I wholeheartedly concur, as this adds the anchovy to an already delightful slice. A snarky comment is not only sarcastically witty or cynical, but also best delivered with nose slightly tilted and eyes cast aside in a carelessly caustic manner.
I must admit, however, that too much snarkiness may not be a good thing. I am not nearly as fond of snarky's cousins, sharkily, snarkier, sharkiest, or other variations. The way snarky slithers off the roof of your mouth, beginning the required nose curl in the process, and ends with the harsh finality of the exhaled breath that exposes the canines as if they were fangs, does not translate nearly as well to other applications. So, let's do our best and keep snarky pure and unmodified for future generations to appreciate.
A "snarky" comment is critical in a sarcastic and cynical sort of way. Apparently, the adjective dates back to early 20th century British slang. According to one online dictionary, snarky comes from snark, meaning to nag, snore, or snort from the Dutch and Low German word snorken. To be honest, I don't care about the origin - I just like the word. Snarky is one of those words that one does not really need to know in order to surmise its meaning from context. When someone says, "That was a really snarky thing to say," you really get the picture without Webster's help.
Some definitions I found included a tint of snottiness or arrogance to the meaning of snarky. I wholeheartedly concur, as this adds the anchovy to an already delightful slice. A snarky comment is not only sarcastically witty or cynical, but also best delivered with nose slightly tilted and eyes cast aside in a carelessly caustic manner.
I must admit, however, that too much snarkiness may not be a good thing. I am not nearly as fond of snarky's cousins, sharkily, snarkier, sharkiest, or other variations. The way snarky slithers off the roof of your mouth, beginning the required nose curl in the process, and ends with the harsh finality of the exhaled breath that exposes the canines as if they were fangs, does not translate nearly as well to other applications. So, let's do our best and keep snarky pure and unmodified for future generations to appreciate.
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Illusions in America Today #4
I am fortunate to have a little earth mother friend in California who I love dearly. We are kindred spirits in vital ways, particularly regarding our passion for youth ministry. But, one issue separates us. She is vegan and I am an unrepentant carnivore.
I kid her about her diet, mainly because I am a wise guy and I tend to poke fun at people I care about. But to be honest, I respect her immensely. I also know that many of my dietary choices are not choices at all, but simply 50+ years of conditioning and bad habits. Discussing disillusions of America today, we must address our increasingly non-sustainable lifestyle and our hypocritical reverence for life.
The vegan issue recently arose in my church, followed by the strident and intemperate voices that always seem to surround the discourse. Like many other topics we Unitarian Universalists discuss, we often fail to allow people time to process the information, express their own points of view, and perhaps in time, come to agreement. Many people know far more about diet and nutrition than I do. But even the most ardent meat-eater must experience a twinge of angst at the industry surrounding the production of beef, chicken, pork, etc.
The cruelty of slaughterhouses and industrial farms does weigh heavy on my mind. I also recognize that the food I learned to eat as a child and to prepare as an adult is not the best diet for human health and well being. But, to me, to essential issue for Unitarian Universalists is life. If we affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence, then we must respect all life. That commitment calls on us to stop extinguishing billions of lives each year to sustain a diet that is not healthy or sustainable.
The answer is at least vegetarianism, and eventually a vegan lifestyle. I will be the first to admit, this choice will be hard for me. But, my little earth mother makes a mean vegan brownie and delicious cookies. So, maybe she can help me learn to like tofu and edamame beans on my pizza, too.
P.S. Right on the ball, my friend sent me this article from the January 27, 2008 New York Times, titled "Rethinking the Meat Guzzler." I'm not moved by some of the arguments, but there are enough different approaches to the subject that I imagine any carnivore will experience some discomfort.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?ex=1202101200&en=ae87f466b2f0f394&ei=5070&emc=eta1
I kid her about her diet, mainly because I am a wise guy and I tend to poke fun at people I care about. But to be honest, I respect her immensely. I also know that many of my dietary choices are not choices at all, but simply 50+ years of conditioning and bad habits. Discussing disillusions of America today, we must address our increasingly non-sustainable lifestyle and our hypocritical reverence for life.
The vegan issue recently arose in my church, followed by the strident and intemperate voices that always seem to surround the discourse. Like many other topics we Unitarian Universalists discuss, we often fail to allow people time to process the information, express their own points of view, and perhaps in time, come to agreement. Many people know far more about diet and nutrition than I do. But even the most ardent meat-eater must experience a twinge of angst at the industry surrounding the production of beef, chicken, pork, etc.
The cruelty of slaughterhouses and industrial farms does weigh heavy on my mind. I also recognize that the food I learned to eat as a child and to prepare as an adult is not the best diet for human health and well being. But, to me, to essential issue for Unitarian Universalists is life. If we affirm and promote respect for the interdependent web of all existence, then we must respect all life. That commitment calls on us to stop extinguishing billions of lives each year to sustain a diet that is not healthy or sustainable.
The answer is at least vegetarianism, and eventually a vegan lifestyle. I will be the first to admit, this choice will be hard for me. But, my little earth mother makes a mean vegan brownie and delicious cookies. So, maybe she can help me learn to like tofu and edamame beans on my pizza, too.
P.S. Right on the ball, my friend sent me this article from the January 27, 2008 New York Times, titled "Rethinking the Meat Guzzler." I'm not moved by some of the arguments, but there are enough different approaches to the subject that I imagine any carnivore will experience some discomfort.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/27/weekinreview/27bittman.html?ex=1202101200&en=ae87f466b2f0f394&ei=5070&emc=eta1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

